Paleveda

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 NICHOLAS EWING PALEVEDA, Case No. 24-cv-08716-RMI

Plaintiff,

ORDER

v. 9 Re: Dkt. Nos. 33, 34 ALAMEDA COUNTY, et al., Defendants.

12 Plaintiff, a detainee, filed a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The amended complaint was dismissed with leave for Plaintiff to file a second amended complaint. (Dkt. 32). Plaintiff submitted filings seeking an extension of time and for the court to appoint counsel. (Dkts. 33, 34). There is no constitutional right to counsel in a civil case. Lassiter v. Dep’t of Social Services, 452 U.S. 18, 25 (1981). District courts may “request” that counsel represent a litigant who is proceeding in forma pauperis, as Plaintiff is here. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). However, that does not give the courts the power to make “coercive appointments of counsel.” Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 310 (1989). The Ninth Circuit has held that a district court may ask counsel to represent an indigent litigant only in…